Download
draft ashwood ccamp gmpls constraint reqts 00 txt n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
draft-ashwood-ccamp-gmpls-constraint-reqts-00.txt PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
draft-ashwood-ccamp-gmpls-constraint-reqts-00.txt

draft-ashwood-ccamp-gmpls-constraint-reqts-00.txt

94 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

draft-ashwood-ccamp-gmpls-constraint-reqts-00.txt

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. draft-ashwood-ccamp-gmpls-constraint-reqts-00.txt Don Fedyk dwfedyk@nortel.com Peter Ashwood-Smith petera@nortel.com Vik Saxena Vik_Saxena@cable.comcast.com

  2. Problem • GMPLS for pure photonic network is undefined • Photonic control plane is and has been a little too complicated to standardize • Can we support a GMPLS peered interface?

  3. Requirements • Management of complete paths IP and photonic • Path Computation across IP and photonic plane • Requires GMPLS Routing, Topology, path computation and signaling • Being able to reconfigure bandwidth and IP traffic together (GMPLS path management). • Support of Blocking Constraints Staying within the laws of physics and economics 

  4. Models • Draft explores three Models • Network abstraction (cloud) • Virtual Node abstraction • No abstraction • We currently favor Nodal abstraction

  5. Abstraction PHYSICAL REPRESENTATION Y OpticalDomain C Z OpticalDomain D OpticalDomain A OpticalDomain B X LOGICAL REPRESENTATION C Y c4 c5 y1 c6 y2 c3 c1 c2 b6 d4 b7 d3 d5 z1 b1 a1 Z b5 d2 x1 a5 d6 z2 a2 b2 b4 d1 a4 x2 a3 b3 A D X B - Each physical Domain is logically represented as a GLSR. GLSR does itssub-domain computation based on its own physics models.

  6. Why CCAMP? • Customers want IP Standards based solution • Initial Requirements draft to solicit interest • Would like to standardize extensions to GMPLS signaling and routing for photonic networks • Goal to work towards a WG Draft